People v. Barnslater

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that the evidence was not “newly discovered” because defendant did not show that the victim’s recantation could not have been obtained earlier
• concluding that the evidence was not “newly discovered” because defendant did not show that the victim’s recantation could not have been obtained earlier
• concluding that the evidence was not “newly discovered” because defendant did not show that the victim’s recantation could not have been obtained earlier
• court held “actual innocence” means total vindication or exoneration and does not concern whether a defendant has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
• “newly discovered evidence ‘which merely impeaches a witness’ will typically not be of such conclusive character as to justify postconviction relief” (quoting -7- People v. Chew, 160 Ill. App. 3d 1082, 1086 (1987))
• “evidence is not ‘newly discovered’ when it presents facts already known to the defendant at or prior to trial, though the source of those facts may have been unknown, unavailable, or uncooperative” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).